NIL NISI BONUM. INVASION PANICS. TO GOLDENHAIR (FROM HORACE). By THOMAS HOOD. FRAMLEY PARSONAGE. Chapters 4, 5 and 6. TITHONUS. By ALFRED TENNYSON. WILLIAM HOGARTH: PAINTER, ENGRAVER, AND PHILOSOPHER. Essays on the Man, the Work, and the Time.—_I. Little Boy Hogarth._ UNSPOKEN DIALOGUE. By R. MONCKTON MILNES. (With an Illustration.) STUDIES IN ANIMAL LIFE. Chapter 2. CURIOUS IF TRUE. (Extract from a Letter from Richard Whittingham, Esq.) LIFE AMONG THE LIGHTHOUSES. LOVEL THE WIDOWER. Chapter 2. (With an Illustration.) AS ESSAY WITHOUT END. NOTICE TO CORRESPONDENTS. ⁂ _Communications for the Editor should be addressed to the care of Messrs. SMITH, ELDER AND CO., 65, Cornhill, and not to the Editor’s private residence. The Editor cannot be responsible for the return of rejected contributions._ THE CORNHILL MAGAZINE. MARCH, 1860. A Few Words on Junius and Macaulay. The “secret of Junius” has been kept until, like over-ripe wines, the subject has lost its flavour. Languid indeed is the disposition of mind in which any, except a few veterans who still prefer the old post-road to the modern railway, take up an essay or an article professing to throw new light on that wearisome mystery, or to add some hitherto unknown name to the ghostly crowd of candidates for that antiquated prize. And yet there is a deep interest about the inquiry, after all, to those who, from any special cause, are induced to overcome the feeling of satiety which it at first excites, and plunge into the controversy with the energy of their grandfathers. The real force and virulence of those powerful writings, unrivalled then, and scarcely equalled since, let critics say what they may; the strangeness of the fact that none of the quick-sighted, unscrupulous, revengeful men who surrounded Junius at the time of his writing, who brushed past him in the street, drank with him at dinner, sat opposite him in the office, could ever attain to even a probable conjecture of his identity; the irresistible character of the external evidence which fixes the authorship on Francis, contrasted with those startling internal improbabilities which make the Franciscan theory to this day the least popular, although the learned regard it as all but established—the eccentric, repulsive, “dour” character of Francis himself, and the kind of pertinacious longing which besets us to know the interior of a man who shuts himself up against his fellow-men in fixed disdain and silence:—these are powerful incentives, and produce an attraction, of which we are sometimes ourselves ashamed, towards the occupation of treading over and over again this often beaten ground of literary curiosity.